IMPROV-ED trial: eHealth programme for faster recovery and reduced healthcare utilisation after CABG

G J van Steenbergen, D van Veghel, J Ter Woorst, D van Lieshout, L Dekker, G J van Steenbergen, D van Veghel, J Ter Woorst, D van Lieshout, L Dekker

Abstract

Background: After coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), healthcare utilisation is high and is partly unplanned. eHealth applications have been proposed to reduce healthcare consumption and to enable patients to get actively involved in their recovery. This way, healthcare expenses can be reduced and the quality of care can be improved.

Objectives: We aim to evaluate whether the use of an eHealth programme can reduce unplanned healthcare utilisation and improve mental and physical health in the first 6 weeks after discharge in patients who underwent CABG. In addition, patient satisfaction and use of the eHealth programme will be evaluated.

Methods: For this single-centre randomised controlled trial, at least 280 patients referred for CABG will be included at the preoperative outpatient clinic and randomised to an intervention or control group. The intervention group will have access to an eHealth programme, which consists of online educational videos developed by the Dutch Heart Foundation and postoperative video consultations with a physician. The control group will receive standard care and will not have access to the eHealth programme. The primary endpoint is healthcare utilisation; other endpoints include anxiety, duration of recovery, quality of life and patient satisfaction. Participants will complete several questionnaires at 6 time points during the study.

Results: Patient enrolment started in February 2020 and completion of the follow-up period is expected in August 2021.

Conclusion: This randomised trial was initiated to test the hypothesis that patients who are partaking in our eHealth programme use less unplanned care and experience a better quality of life, less anxiety and a faster recovery than controls.

Keywords: Coronary artery bypass grafting; Emergency department visits; Healthcare utilisation; Patient education; Video consultation; eHealth.

Conflict of interest statement

G.J. van Steenbergen, D. van Veghel, J. ter Woorst, D. van Lieshout and L. Dekker declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Welcome screen of the eHealth programme with stratification of topics on which patients can find information: treatment (Behandeling), recovery (Herstel) and healthy living (Gezond leven)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Overview of the portal for the eHealth programme
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Still from the video ‘What is coronary artery bypass surgery?’
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Still from the video ‘How to prepare for coronary artery bypass surgery?’

References

    1. Nederlandse Hart Registratie. Nederlandse Hart Registratie 2018. 2018;(april 2019):249. Available from:
    1. Ferguson TB, Peterson ED, Coombs LP, et al. Use of continuous quality improvement to increase use of process measures in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc. 2003;290:49–56. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.1.49.
    1. Swaminathan M, Phillips-Bute BG, Patel UD, et al. Increasing healthcare resource utilization after coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the United States. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2009;2:305–312. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.108.831016.
    1. Hannan EL, Zhong Y, Lahey SJ, et al. 30-Day readmissions after coronary artery bypass graft surgery in New York State. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:569–576. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2011.01.010.
    1. Shah RM, Zhang Q, Chatterjee S, et al. Incidence, cost, and risk factors for readmission after coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg. 2019;107:1782–1789. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.10.077.
    1. Lie I, Bunch EH, Smeby NA, Arnesen H, Hamilton G. Patients’ experiences with symptoms and needs in the early rehabilitation phase after coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2012;11:14–24. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2010.09.004.
    1. Pedoto A, Perrino AC. Delayed recovery following thoracic surgery: persistent issues and potential interventions. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2019;32:3–9. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000669.
    1. Talboom-Kamp EP, Verdijk NA, Harmans LM, Numans ME, Chavannes NH. An eHealth platform to manage chronic disease in primary care: an innovative approach. Interact J Med Res. 2016;5:e5. doi: 10.2196/ijmr.4217.
    1. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:200–207. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-3-201302050-00583.
    1. Bouwmans C, Hakkaart-van Roijen L, Koopmanschap M, Krol M, Severens H, Brouwer W. Productivity costs questionnaire. 2013. , last access: 15-04-2020, Productivity and Health Research Group. Inst Med Technol Earsmus Univ Rotterdam.
    1. Sanderman R, van der Zee KI. Het meten van de algemene gezondheidstoestand met de Rand-36. 2012. , last access: 15-04-2020, Res Inst SHARE.
    1. Spinhoven P, Ormel J, Sloekers PPA, Kempen GIJM, Speckens AEM, Van Hemert AM. A validation study of the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) in different groups of Dutch subjects. Psychol Med. 1997;27:363–370. doi: 10.1017/S0033291796004382.
    1. Kluivers KB, Hendriks JCM, Mol BWJ, et al. Clinimetric properties of 3 instruments measuring postoperative recovery in a gynecologic surgical population. Surgery. 2008;144:12–21. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2008.03.027.
    1. Jensen BØ, Hughes P, Rasmussen LS, Pedersen PU, Steinbrüchel DA. Health-related quality of life following off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in elderly moderate to high-risk patients: a randomized trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;30:294–299. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.04.015.
    1. Goldsmith IRA, Lip GYH, Patel RL. A prospective study of changes in the quality of life of patients following mitral valve repair and replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2001;20:949–955. doi: 10.1016/S1010-7940(01)00952-6.
    1. Hansen L, Winkel S, Kuhr J, Bader R, Bleese N, Riess FC. Factors influencing survival and postoperative quality of life after mitral valve reconstruction. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2010;37:635–644. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2009.07.044.
    1. Santini F, Montalbano G, Messina A, et al. Survival and quality of life after repair of acute type A aortic dissection in patients aged 75 years and older justify intervention. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;29:386–391. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2005.12.016.
    1. Koertke H, Hoffmann-Koch A, Boethig D, et al. Does the noise of mechanical heart valve prostheses affect quality of life as measured by the SF-36® questionnaire? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2003;24:52–58. doi: 10.1016/S1010-7940(03)00172-6.
    1. van der Meij E, Huirne JA, Bouwsma EV, et al. Substitution of usual perioperative care by eHealth to enhance postoperative recovery in patients undergoing general surgical or gynecological procedures: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2016;5:e245. doi: 10.2196/resprot.6580.
    1. Lilford RJ, Foster J, Pringle M. Evaluating eHealth: how to make evaluation more methodologically robust. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000186. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000186.
    1. Cissell WB. Process evaluation for public health interventions and research. Health Educ Res. 2004;19:739. doi: 10.1093/her/cyg084.
    1. Nederlandse Hart Registratie . NHR Handboek. 2019.
    1. Van der Meij E, Anema JR, Otten RHJ, Huirne JAF, Schaafsma FG. The effect of perioperative e-health interventions on the postoperative course: a systematic review of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials. PLoS One. 2016;11:1–24.
    1. Pattamatta M, Smeets BJJ, Evers SMAA, Peters EG, Luyer MDP, Hiligsmann M. Quality of life and costs of patients prior to colorectal surgery. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2020;20:193–198. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2019.1628641.
    1. Porter M. What is value in health care?—Supplementary appendix 2. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1–3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1011024.
    1. Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, et al. European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. The sixth joint task force of the European Society of Cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. G Ital Cardiol. Rome) 2016;2017(18):547–612.
    1. Frederix I, Caiani EG, Dendale P, et al. ESC e‑cardiology working group position paper: overcoming challenges in digital health implementation in cardiovascular medicine. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2019;26:1166–1177. doi: 10.1177/2047487319832394.
    1. Pagliari C, Sloan D, Gregor P, et al. What is eHealth (4): a scoping exercise to map the field. J Med Internet Res. 2005;7:e9. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7.1.e9.
    1. Brørs G, Pettersen TR, Hansen TB, Fridlund B, Hølvold LB, Lund H, et al. Modes of e-Health delivery in secondary prevention programmes for patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:364. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4106-1.
    1. Miller C, Zimmerman L, Barnason S, Nieveen J. Impact of an early recovery management intervention on functioning in postoperative coronary artery bypass patients with diabetes. Heart Lung. 2007;36:418–430. doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2007.02.011.
    1. Zimmerman L, Barnason S, Nieveen J, Schmaderer M. Symptom management intervention in elderly coronary artery bypass graft patients. Outcomes Manag. 2004;8:5–12.
    1. Körtke H, Stromeyer H, Zittermann A, et al. New East-Westfalian postoperative therapy concept: a telemedicine guide for the study of ambulatory rehabilitation of patients after cardiac surgery. Telemed J E Health. 2006;12:475–483. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2006.12.475.
    1. Barnason S, Zimmerman L, Nieveen J, et al. Influence of a symptom management telehealth intervention on older adults’ early recovery outcomes after coronary artery bypass surgery. Heart Lung. 2009;38:364–376. doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2009.01.005.
    1. Torrance GW. Preferences for health outcomes and cost-utility analysis. Am J Manag Care. 1997;3:S8–S20.
    1. Lorig KR, Ritter P, Stewart AL, et al. Chronic disease self-management program: 2‑year health status and health care utilization outcomes. Med Care. 2001;39:1217–1223. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200111000-00008.
    1. Steventon A, Bardsley M, Billings J, et al. Effect of telehealth on use of secondary care and mortality: findings from the Whole System Demonstrator cluster randomised trial. BMJ. 2012;344:e3874. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e3874.
    1. Lorig KR, Holman HR. Self-management education: History, definition, outcomes, and mechanisms. Ann Behav Med. 2003;26:1–7. doi: 10.1207/S15324796ABM2601_01.
    1. Sørenson K, Van den Broucke S, Fullam J, et al. (HLS-EU). Consortium Health Literacy Project Europe. Health Literacy and public health: a systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health. 2012;25:1053–1058.
    1. Meppelink CS, Van Weert JCM, Haven CJ, Smit EG. The effectiveness of health animations in audiences with different health literacy levels: an experimental study. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17:e11. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3979.
    1. Heijmans M, Zwikker H, van der Heide I, Rademakers J. NIVEL Kennisvraag 2016: zorg op maat. Hoe kunnen we de zorg beter laten aansluiten bij mensen met lage gezondheidsvaardigheden? Utrecht: NIVEL; 2016.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi